Literature DB >> 24648560

Systematic evaluation of commercial susceptibility testing methods for determining the in vitro activity of daptomycin versus Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococci.

Thomas J Kirn1, Elizabeth Onyeaso2, Madiha Syed2, Melvin P Weinstein3.   

Abstract

We systematically evaluated 5 methods for testing daptomycin versus 48 Enterococcus faecalis, 51 Enterococcus faecium, and 50 Staphylococcus aureus isolates using (i and ii) broth microdilution (BMD) with 50-mg/liter calcium medium supplementation (reference method) and 30-mg/liter calcium medium supplementation (BMD30 method), (iii) Etest, and (iv and v) MicroScan panel 33 using 2 methods to prepare the bacterial inoculum (MicroScan turbidity and MicroScan Prompt). Isolates were categorized as susceptible (S) or nonsusceptible (NS) based on measured MICs. Essential (± 1 dilution) agreement (EA) and categorical (S/NS) agreement (CA) for each method were compared to the reference method. For E. faecium, categorical agreement was poor between the reference method and BMD30 as well as with the three commercial methods, with frequent false-NS results (30 for BMD30, 18 for Etest, 22 for MicroScan Prompt, and 25 for MicroScan turbidity). All E. faecalis isolates were judged to be S by the reference method; two of these isolates were categorized as NS using the BMD30 method, and one was categorized as NS by all three commercial methods. All S. aureus isolates were judged to be S using all five methods. MIC values determined by the comparator methods tended to be higher than those for the reference method, especially for E. faecium isolates. EAs between the reference BMD and BMD30, Etest, MicroScan Prompt, and MicroScan turbidity were 63%, 63%, 63%, and 56%, respectively, for E. faecium, 87%, 83%, 98%, and 80%, respectively, for E. faecalis, and all 100% for S. aureus.
Copyright © 2014, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24648560      PMCID: PMC4042769          DOI: 10.1128/JCM.03439-13

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  16 in total

1.  Daptomycin susceptibility tests: interpretive criteria, quality control, and effect of calcium on in vitro tests.

Authors:  P C Fuchs; A L Barry; S D Brown
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.803

2.  The effect of cultural conditions on the activity of LY146032 against staphylococci and streptococci.

Authors:  J H Andrew; M C Wale; L J Wale; D Greenwood
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  1987-08       Impact factor: 5.790

3.  In vitro and in vivo activity of LY 146032, a new cyclic lipopeptide antibiotic.

Authors:  G M Eliopoulos; S Willey; E Reiszner; P G Spitzer; G Caputo; R C Moellering
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Antimicrobial activity of daptomycin tested against gram-positive strains collected in European hospitals: results from 7 years of resistance surveillance (2003-2009).

Authors:  H S Sader; D J Farrell; R N Jones
Journal:  J Chemother       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 1.714

5.  [Comparative study of the susceptibility to daptomycin and other antimicrobials against Staphylococcus spp. resistant to methicillin and Enterococcus spp. using Wider, E-test, and microdilution methods].

Authors:  J L Gómez-Garcés; F López-Fabal; A Burillo; Y Gil
Journal:  Rev Esp Quimioter       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.553

6.  Genetic basis for daptomycin resistance in enterococci.

Authors:  Kelli L Palmer; Anu Daniel; Crystal Hardy; Jared Silverman; Michael S Gilmore
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2011-04-18       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Antimicrobial susceptibility of daptomycin and comparator agents tested against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococci: trend analysis of a 6-year period in US medical centers (2005-2010).

Authors:  Helio S Sader; Gary J Moet; David J Farrell; Ronald N Jones
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2011-05-04       Impact factor: 2.803

8.  Evaluation of daptomycin susceptibility testing by Etest and the effect of different batches of media.

Authors:  P C Fuchs; A L Barry; S D Brown
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 5.790

9.  Genetic basis for in vivo daptomycin resistance in enterococci.

Authors:  Cesar A Arias; Diana Panesso; Danielle M McGrath; Xiang Qin; Maria F Mojica; Corwin Miller; Lorena Diaz; Truc T Tran; Sandra Rincon; E Magda Barbu; Jinnethe Reyes; Jung H Roh; Elizabeth Lobos; Erica Sodergren; Renata Pasqualini; Wadih Arap; John P Quinn; Yousif Shamoo; Barbara E Murray; George M Weinstock
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-09-08       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Update of the in vitro activity of daptomycin tested against 6710 Gram-positive cocci isolated in North America (2006).

Authors:  Mariana Castanheira; Ronald N Jones; Hélio S Sader
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2008-03-07       Impact factor: 2.803

View more
  2 in total

1.  Impact of an Antimicrobial Stewardship Intervention on Within- and Between-Patient Daptomycin Resistance Evolution in Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium.

Authors:  Clare L Kinnear; Twisha S Patel; Carol L Young; Vincent Marshall; Duane W Newton; Andrew F Read; Robert J Woods
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2019-03-27       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Combining CRISPRi and metabolomics for functional annotation of compound libraries.

Authors:  Miquel Anglada-Girotto; Gabriel Handschin; Karin Ortmayr; Adrian I Campos; Ludovic Gillet; Pablo Manfredi; Claire V Mulholland; Michael Berney; Urs Jenal; Paola Picotti; Mattia Zampieri
Journal:  Nat Chem Biol       Date:  2022-02-22       Impact factor: 16.174

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.